June 10, 2009: Star Trek
I had heard plenty of positive things about the new Star Trek film, the Rotten Tomatoes rating was in the 90s, and even Star Trek purists were pleased with the results. This is usually a recipe for disaster, with raised expectations going into a movie, but Star Trek really does deliver.
This is an appropriate reboot of the franchise. The original cast (from the 1966-69 series and movies from 1979 and on) are significantly older now and would be out of place in an action film. The Next Generation crew from the 1987-1994 series (and the films since 1994) churned out some decent entries and some stinkers over the past 15 years, and it’s time to let them move on as well. So where do you go from there? Well, in this case you go back to before the beginning – when the original characters were just starting their careers.
This technique opens up the best of all worlds. We’re wall-to-wall with familiar characters, but mostly with fresh faces portraying them, allowing for new interpretations but tying into the fun personality traits before they became tired caricatures of themselves. Foreshadowing as well as blissful ignorance of future events are exploited for both drama and comedy. We’re also witnessing the start of several decades-long friendships, and it’s startling to see how unlikely they were. I’m often struck by the realization that every person’s entire circle of friends is built through a series of coincidences, and circumstances largely beyond their control.
Researching after the fact, I had completely misunderstood the career of director JJ Abrams, which probably explains the higher-than-expected quality of the film. I had thought of him as being another mindless action director like Michael Bay or McG, but it turns out he’s a geek culture visionary, having earlier been involved with the TV shows Alias and Felicity, primarily as a writer, and more recently being the writer/producer behind the popular TV series Lost, which I’ll admit for the record I’ve never seen. His only previous feature directing job was Mission: Impossible III, which might explain where I got the impression that he was a mindless action director. So in JJ Abrams we have someone who is prepared to respect the concept and the canon and turn out a faithful film which the fans can get behind.
The main focus of the story is on the young and rebellious James T. Kirk, as he struggles to find his career direction and meets his new friends. The parallels among generations are extended even further back as we learn more of Kirk’s father and the influence he had or didn’t have on the choices young James has made. Suitable action set pieces are put forward, with Romulans this time around, and there are time travel elements (which I always like) although the story doesn’t hang exclusively on these.
I have some scientific objections to the details, primarily with the particulars of the “red matter” people are worrying about, and how it is super-explosive when it suits the story, but not quite so powerful when it would obliterate the good guys. The pacing of the two-hour film is great, and it flies by. I might have shortened it but only by 5 minutes or less. This is a compact movie which packs in a lot. I can definitely add to the pile of recommendations the reader will undoubtedly have seen elsewhere in the months since the film’s release.
Faithful, gripping reboot of a franchise.
Post a Comment